Transcript The Four Errors

The Four Errors
Things NOT to Do in Writing and
Speaking
The Four Errors
1.
2.
3.
4.
Faulty Logic
Attacks
Weak Reference
Misinformation
Faulty Logic
1.
Contradiction: presenting conflicting
information.
Example: If a politician runs on a platform
supporting reducing taxes, then states that
she would vote for a bill designed to
increase taxes, that politician has committed
the error of contradiction.
Faulty Logic
2.
Accident: failing to recognize that an
argument is based on the exception to a
rule.
Example: If a student concludes that his
friend always goes to an amusement park
on the first Saturday each summer because
he saw his friend go once to celebrate a
cousin’s graduation, that student has
committed the error of accident.
Faulty Logic
3. False Cause: confusing a temporal (time) order
of events with causality or oversimplifying the
reasons behind some event or occurrence.
Example: If a person concludes that his
favorite team won a game because the game
was sold out, he is guilty of ascribing a false
cause. The sell-out crowd may have
contributed to his team winning the game,
but there were also many other contributing
factors.
Faulty Logic
4. Begging the Question: making a claim and then
arguing for the claim by using statements that
are simply the equivalent of the original claim.
Example: If a person says that a personal
computer he built for himself is better than
any other computer being sold and then
backs up his statement by simply saying that
it is superior to other computers, he is
begging the question.
Faulty Logic
5. Evading the Issue: changing the topic to
avoid addressing the issue.
Example: A person is evading the issue
if she begins talking about high salaries
for professional athletes when asked
about her opinions on insurance fraud.
Faulty Logic
6. Arguing from Ignorance: arguing that a
claim is justified simply because its
opposite has not been proven true.
Example: If a person argues that there
is no life after death because there is
no proof of such existence, he is
arguing from ignorance.
Faulty Logic
7. Composition/Division: asserting something about a
whole that is really only true of its parts is composition;
division is asserting about all of the parts something that
is generally, but not always, true of the whole.
Example: If a person asserts that all police officers
use excessive force because one police officer is
found to have use excessive force, she is
committing composition. If a person states that a
particular reporter supports liberal causes simply
because reporters are generally known for being
liberal, he is committing the error of division.
Attacks
1.
Poisoning the Well: being so completely
committed to a position that you explain away
absolutely everything that is offered in
opposition to your position.
Example: If a researcher argues against the
findings of 10 studies proposing a contrary
position by claiming that each study was
based on flawed methodology without
offering proof for these claims, she is
poisoning the well.
Attacks
2. Arguing Against the Person: rejecting a
claim using derogatory facts (real or
alleged) about the person who is making
the claim.
Example: If a person argues against
another person’s position on morality
by alleging he accepted a bribe, she is
arguing against the person.
Attacks
3. Appealing to Force: using threats to
establish the validity of a claim.
Example: if a person threatens to report
a lie you told to a person because you
disagree with her on a social issue, she
is appealing to force.
Weak Reference
1.
Sources that Reflect Biases: consistently
accepting information that supports what
we already believe to be true or
consistently rejecting information that
goes against what we believe to be true.
Example: a person is guilty of a bias if
he rejects evidence supporting claims
of faith simply because he does not
believe in faith.
Weak Reference
2. Sources that Lack Credibility: using a source
that is not reputable for a given topic, such as
when a source is known to be biased or has little
knowledge of the topic.
Example: A person is guilty of using a source
that lacks credibility when he supports his
claims by citing research from an individual
known for questionable methodology.
Weak Reference
3. Appealing to Authority: invoking authority
as a last word on an issue.
Example: If a person claims that a local
government policy is valid and supports
this claim by saying that the city council
said so, she is appealing to authority.
Weak Reference
4. Appealing to the People: attempting to
justify a claim based on its popularity.
Example: if a boy tells his parents that
he should have a television in his room
because all his friends have one, he is
appealing to the people.
Weak Reference
5. Appealing to Emotion: using a “sob story”
as proof for a claim.
Example: if someone uses the story of
a tragic illness as a means to convince
people to agree with her opinion on
health care reform, she is appealing to
emotion.
Misinformation
1.
Confusing the facts: using information
that seems to be factual but that has
been changed in such a way that it is no
longer accurate.
Example: A person is confusing the
facts if he backs up his claim by telling
a recent news story with key details
missing.
Misinformation
2. Misapplying a Concept or Generalization:
misunderstanding or wrongly applying a
concept or generalization to support a
claim.
Example: if someone argues that a
person should be arrested after losing
a civil case, the person has
misunderstood the concept of civil law.